This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
p.2 #1CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
mcbroomf wrote:
Fingers crossed!!!Maybe they upgraded it .. good luck! I just bought an 85/2.8 C/Y that I'll be using it with as well.
In point of fact, the C/Y 85/2.8 is 88 mm true focal length, meaning that it is not very different from the 100/3.5 in that regard. Do you need a slower lens that gives you only 12mm extra reach? I'm not knocking the 100/3.5, as it is extremely sharp and renders beautifully, but it may not add much to what you can get from the 85/2.8.
Rob
DavidBM wrote
I see that your first adapter wasn't quite wide enough for full frame. I too ordered the cheap rather than Kipon one that describes itself as C/Y to NEX. But it does list A7 and A7r in the compatibility list.Fingers crossed!!!
In point of fact, the C/Y 85/2.8 is 88 mm true focal length, meaning that it is not very different from the 100/3.5 in that regard. Do you need a slower lens that gives you only 12mm extra reach? I'm not knocking the 100/3.5, as it is extremely sharp and renders beautifully, but it may not add much to what you can get from the 85/2.8.
Rob
Apr 24, 2016 at 12:32 PM
p.2 #2CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
robgo2 wrote:
Fingers crossed!!!Maybe they upgraded it .. good luck! I just bought an 85/2.8 C/Y that I'll be using it with as well.In point of fact, the C/Y 85/2.8 is 88 mm true focal length, meaning that it is not very different from the 100/3.5 in that regard. Do you need a slower lens that gives you only 12mm extra reach? I'm not knocking the 100/3.5, as it is extremely sharp and renders beautifully, but it may not add much to what you can get from the 85/2.8.
Rob
Not really sure, it could well be that I don't keep both, or just put one of them in my bag depending on other lenses. The 85 should be here in a day or 2, it;s just cleared customs.
mcbroomf wrote
DavidBM wrote
I see that your first adapter wasn't quite wide enough for full frame. I too ordered the cheap rather than Kipon one that describes itself as C/Y to NEX. But it does list A7 and A7r in the compatibility list.Fingers crossed!!!
Rob
Not really sure, it could well be that I don't keep both, or just put one of them in my bag depending on other lenses. The 85 should be here in a day or 2, it;s just cleared customs.
Apr 24, 2016 at 01:40 PM
p.2 #3CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Is there a database somewhere that has dimension/weight for all these older legacy lenses? I have a really hard time finding this info for some of them.
Apr 24, 2016 at 03:51 PM
p.2 #4CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
For Zeiss lenses of various eras: http://www.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_us/service/download_center.html
Some datasheets (like S100) may only be available in German: http://www.zeiss.de/camera-lenses/de_de/service/download_center.html
Some datasheets (like S100) may only be available in German: http://www.zeiss.de/camera-lenses/de_de/service/download_center.html
Apr 24, 2016 at 03:55 PM
p.2 #5CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Vcize wrote:
Is there a database somewhere that has dimension/weight for all these older legacy lenses? I have a really hard time finding this info for some of them.
Here is a Zeiss database for almost all of the C/Y lenses:
http://www.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/contax_yashica.html
And here is the Contax Zeiss Survival Guide. I have found it to be very helpful.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92044-Contax-Zeiss-Survival-Guide
Rob
Is there a database somewhere that has dimension/weight for all these older legacy lenses? I have a really hard time finding this info for some of them.
Here is a Zeiss database for almost all of the C/Y lenses:
http://www.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/contax_yashica.html
And here is the Contax Zeiss Survival Guide. I have found it to be very helpful.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92044-Contax-Zeiss-Survival-Guide
Rob
Apr 24, 2016 at 03:55 PM
p.2 #6CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Hmm, the S100 datasheet has gone missing (again) from the Zeiss web site.
More CZ C/Y resources include Cees de Groot: http://cdegroot.com/photo-contax-lenses/
And also the famous Italian ilprode pages: http://www.oocities.org/ilprode/TestZ.htm
More CZ C/Y resources include Cees de Groot: http://cdegroot.com/photo-contax-lenses/
And also the famous Italian ilprode pages: http://www.oocities.org/ilprode/TestZ.htm
Apr 24, 2016 at 04:07 PM
p.2 #7CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
rico wrote:
Hmm, the S100 datasheet has gone missing (again) from the Zeiss web site...
You can download the German data sheet for the CZ 100/3.5 CY from here,
http://www.jcolwell.ca/share/CY%20100mm%20Sonnar3.5_100mm_d.pdf
Hmm, the S100 datasheet has gone missing (again) from the Zeiss web site...
You can download the German data sheet for the CZ 100/3.5 CY from here,
http://www.jcolwell.ca/share/CY%20100mm%20Sonnar3.5_100mm_d.pdf
Apr 24, 2016 at 06:32 PM
p.2 #8CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Vcize wrote:
Is there a database somewhere that has dimension/weight for all these older legacy lenses?
They're all listed in the Lens Price Database,
Lens$db, http://tinyurl.com/jcolwell-lensdb
Is there a database somewhere that has dimension/weight for all these older legacy lenses?
They're all listed in the Lens Price Database,
Lens$db, http://tinyurl.com/jcolwell-lensdb
Apr 24, 2016 at 06:35 PM
p.2 #9CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
OK this is ridiculous. I've just blown 50 USD on the Contax Metal Hood 5 and the relevant adapter, which was the original hood solution for the Sonnar 100/3.5. And my sonnar hasn't even arrived.
WHY
? A cheap eBay 55mm screw in filter for a tenth of that would have been fine. Am I becoming a collector? Nooooooo.
At least I couldn't let myself by the approved Hood 1 for the VS 35-70 (on the basis that it's vestigial and almost entirely useless at any length other than 35 and is probably too small even for that). A good old fashioned three position rubber hood is what you need on one of these standard zooms.
WHY
? A cheap eBay 55mm screw in filter for a tenth of that would have been fine. Am I becoming a collector? Nooooooo.At least I couldn't let myself by the approved Hood 1 for the VS 35-70 (on the basis that it's vestigial and almost entirely useless at any length other than 35 and is probably too small even for that). A good old fashioned three position rubber hood is what you need on one of these standard zooms.
Apr 25, 2016 at 05:11 AM
p.2 #10CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
DavidBM wrote:
OK this is ridiculous. I've just blown 50 USD on the Contax Metal Hood 5 and the relevant adapter, which was the original hood solution for the Sonnar 100/3.5. And my sonnar hasn't even arrived.
WHY? A cheap eBay 55mm screw in filter for a tenth of that would have been fine. Am I becoming a collector? Nooooooo.
At least I couldn't let myself by the approved Hood 1 for the VS 35-70 (on the basis that it's vestigial and almost entirely useless at any length other than 35 and is probably too small even for that). A good old fashioned three...Show more →
... ahh, the slippery slope. The good news is that if/as you acquire more Contax lenses the hoods by and large can be used on more than 1 lens. I have the #5 on my 100-300mm VS but I need a reasonably priced 55/86 ring to use it on the 100/3.5
For anyone interested this is a good resource for compatibility
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/contax/shared/accessory/hoods.htm
OK this is ridiculous. I've just blown 50 USD on the Contax Metal Hood 5 and the relevant adapter, which was the original hood solution for the Sonnar 100/3.5. And my sonnar hasn't even arrived.
WHY
? A cheap eBay 55mm screw in filter for a tenth of that would have been fine. Am I becoming a collector? Nooooooo.At least I couldn't let myself by the approved Hood 1 for the VS 35-70 (on the basis that it's vestigial and almost entirely useless at any length other than 35 and is probably too small even for that). A good old fashioned three...Show more →
... ahh, the slippery slope. The good news is that if/as you acquire more Contax lenses the hoods by and large can be used on more than 1 lens. I have the #5 on my 100-300mm VS but I need a reasonably priced 55/86 ring to use it on the 100/3.5For anyone interested this is a good resource for compatibility
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/contax/shared/accessory/hoods.htm
Apr 25, 2016 at 06:29 AM
p.2 #11CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I'm getting serious remorse here with this renewed interest in CY lenses. I sold all of mine except the 28 2.8 and 85 2.8. All were pretty mint and the most recent that I could find. I still have pretty much all of the hoods and adapters and would like to find them a good home, although I can't imagine anyone using them. They are huge! I have:
3 - 55/86 rings, 1 mint, 1 excellent ++, one excellent.
1 - 67/86 ring, good condition
1 - W1 hood (21 2.8)
1 - W1 hood and cap (Chinese copy)
1 - Hood 1
1 - Hood 2
1 - Hood 3
1 - Hood 4
1 - Hood 5
All excellent - mint condition
I've never sold on FM, so I don't know the protocol, but I'm happy do do the listing and pay the fees if anyone is interested. I'm too lazy to sell these induvidually and I would like them to go to a good home, so if interested, make me an offer.
3 - 55/86 rings, 1 mint, 1 excellent ++, one excellent.
1 - 67/86 ring, good condition
1 - W1 hood (21 2.8)
1 - W1 hood and cap (Chinese copy)
1 - Hood 1
1 - Hood 2
1 - Hood 3
1 - Hood 4
1 - Hood 5
All excellent - mint condition
I've never sold on FM, so I don't know the protocol, but I'm happy do do the listing and pay the fees if anyone is interested. I'm too lazy to sell these induvidually and I would like them to go to a good home, so if interested, make me an offer.
Apr 25, 2016 at 07:20 AM
p.2 #12CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
The bad news for David is there are other OEM accessories that he can enjoy with his Contax lenses, including carrying case (in Burgundy leather), pouches (black leather or vinyl), and the screw-in metal caps with Contax logo. The humanity!
Apr 25, 2016 at 07:28 AM
p.2 #13CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Rob L wrote:
I'm getting serious remorse here with this renewed interest in CY lenses. I sold all of mine except the 28 2.8 and 85 2.8. All were pretty mint and the most recent that I could find. I still have pretty much all of the hoods and adapters and would like to find them a good home, although I can't imagine anyone using them. They are huge! I have:
3 - 55/86 rings, 1 mint, 1 excellent ++, one excellent.
1 - 67/86 ring, good condition
1 - W1 hood (21 2.8)
1 - W1 hood and cap (Chinese copy)
1 - Hood 1
1 -...Show more →
Don't have too much remorse! It's lovely glass, but for practical purposes the ones you have left are among the few make the most sense: high quality compact lenses of a focal length that, in the eighties, could be made to give superb quality.
The more ambitious lenses were state of the art for their time, but their time has gone (and it's only the fact that making a good say 85 2.8 or a slowish short range zoom is not fashionable which keeps these lenses some of us are interested in practically relevant. If modern say Loxia or similar 85 2.8s or 28 2.8s come along, or a high but slow 35-70 we can expect these old beauties to be able to rest in collectors cabinets for ever. We might get those fixed lenses - a good slow zoom seems unlikely, as the marketers seem to think it's either good and fast and wide ranging, or if smaller range or slower then either budget or prioritising compactness at all cost.
I'd be very happy to take the 67-8x adapter and the Hood 1 off your hands -- PM me if you are interested and we can make sure any fees are covered, but if you prefer to sell the lot together I quite understand!
I'm getting serious remorse here with this renewed interest in CY lenses. I sold all of mine except the 28 2.8 and 85 2.8. All were pretty mint and the most recent that I could find. I still have pretty much all of the hoods and adapters and would like to find them a good home, although I can't imagine anyone using them. They are huge! I have:
3 - 55/86 rings, 1 mint, 1 excellent ++, one excellent.
1 - 67/86 ring, good condition
1 - W1 hood (21 2.8)
1 - W1 hood and cap (Chinese copy)
1 - Hood 1
1 -...Show more →
Don't have too much remorse! It's lovely glass, but for practical purposes the ones you have left are among the few make the most sense: high quality compact lenses of a focal length that, in the eighties, could be made to give superb quality.
The more ambitious lenses were state of the art for their time, but their time has gone (and it's only the fact that making a good say 85 2.8 or a slowish short range zoom is not fashionable which keeps these lenses some of us are interested in practically relevant. If modern say Loxia or similar 85 2.8s or 28 2.8s come along, or a high but slow 35-70 we can expect these old beauties to be able to rest in collectors cabinets for ever. We might get those fixed lenses - a good slow zoom seems unlikely, as the marketers seem to think it's either good and fast and wide ranging, or if smaller range or slower then either budget or prioritising compactness at all cost.
I'd be very happy to take the 67-8x adapter and the Hood 1 off your hands -- PM me if you are interested and we can make sure any fees are covered, but if you prefer to sell the lot together I quite understand!
Apr 25, 2016 at 08:05 AM
p.2 #14CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
DavidBM wrote:
OK this is ridiculous. I've just blown 50 USD on the Contax Metal Hood 5 and the relevant adapter, which was the original hood solution for the Sonnar 100/3.5...
The Metal Hood 5 is pretty big on the CZ 100/3.5 CY, as shown below, in comparison with the Takumar 135/200mm hood that I use on mine (with three generic step rings below the MH5 hood and one below the Tak). I could use an even smaller hood, but I'm OK with it.
Contax CZ 100mm f/3.5 CY with Contax Metal Hood 5 (left) and Takumar 135/200mm hood (right)
OK this is ridiculous. I've just blown 50 USD on the Contax Metal Hood 5 and the relevant adapter, which was the original hood solution for the Sonnar 100/3.5...
The Metal Hood 5 is pretty big on the CZ 100/3.5 CY, as shown below, in comparison with the Takumar 135/200mm hood that I use on mine (with three generic step rings below the MH5 hood and one below the Tak). I could use an even smaller hood, but I'm OK with it.
© jcolwell 2016
Contax CZ 100mm f/3.5 CY with Contax Metal Hood 5 (left) and Takumar 135/200mm hood (right)
Apr 25, 2016 at 08:18 AM
p.2 #15CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I use 55/86 Ring with very big Metal Hood 4.
its good for Customer Lens Porn,
if they doubt about the tiny (but great²) 85mm 2.8 Sonnar.
its good for Customer Lens Porn,
if they doubt about the tiny (but great²) 85mm 2.8 Sonnar.
Apr 25, 2016 at 10:44 AM
p.2 #16CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
mcbroomf wrote:
... ahh, the slippery slope.
Slippery slope?
Oh, that slippery slope.
Edited on May 19, 2019 at 08:53 AM · View previous versions
... ahh, the slippery slope.Slippery slope?
Oh, that slippery slope.
Edited on May 19, 2019 at 08:53 AM · View previous versions
Apr 25, 2016 at 03:41 PM
p.2 #17CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Paraphrase ... Contax lenses had their time back in the 80's and if more modern Loxia type versions were made these fine old Contax would be relegated to collectors cabinets ....
I have trouble understanding that sentiment. Firstly if Zeiss decided to make a Loxia 85 f/2.8 or 100 f/3.5 I would think the price would be in the €800 region given their current offerings.
Compared to these sub €200 old Contax lenses I would suggest these are seriously good value for money. One is missing the electronic coupling that can invoke focus magnification but other than that I prefer the renderings of the older Zeiss compared the sterile modern Zeiss lenses.
Secondly and more importantly, these old lenses are available now to enjoy, why wish away shooting time on vapourware.
I currently enjoy the CY 18 f/4, 28 f/2, 85 f/2.8, 100 f/2 & f3.5 and the big Vario Sonner 28-85, all quality metal lenses, none of this plastic miss aligned rubbish coming out of the factory in Thailand.
I do how ever miss the modern convenience of AF and have a few native E Mount lenses, but they seem to lack the rendering I like.
I have trouble understanding that sentiment. Firstly if Zeiss decided to make a Loxia 85 f/2.8 or 100 f/3.5 I would think the price would be in the €800 region given their current offerings.
Compared to these sub €200 old Contax lenses I would suggest these are seriously good value for money. One is missing the electronic coupling that can invoke focus magnification but other than that I prefer the renderings of the older Zeiss compared the sterile modern Zeiss lenses.
Secondly and more importantly, these old lenses are available now to enjoy, why wish away shooting time on vapourware.
I currently enjoy the CY 18 f/4, 28 f/2, 85 f/2.8, 100 f/2 & f3.5 and the big Vario Sonner 28-85, all quality metal lenses, none of this plastic miss aligned rubbish coming out of the factory in Thailand.
I do how ever miss the modern convenience of AF and have a few native E Mount lenses, but they seem to lack the rendering I like.
Apr 25, 2016 at 04:18 PM
p.2 #18CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Eoin wrote:
Paraphrase ... Contax lenses had their time back in the 80's and if more modern Loxia type versions were made these fine old Contax would be relegated to collectors cabinets ....
I have trouble understanding that sentiment. Firstly if Zeiss decided to make a Loxia 85 f/2.8 or 100 f/3.5 I would think the price would be in the €800 region given their current offerings.
Compared to these sub €200 old Contax lenses I would suggest these are seriously good value for money. One is missing the electronic coupling that can invoke focus magnification but other than that I prefer the renderings...Show more →
You are quite right about the value. I was talking partly in jest - even if optically better and equally small lenses come along in the lox line, for some of these old c/y lenses will still be close and a lot cheaper and thus be a very useful for many of us.
I don't, however prefer the 'rendering' of these lenses to the loxias; in fact the look of the lox 21 hands down the most impressive I've seen in a wide. Almost enough to make believe in 3D pop or some such. No not really, only kidding, it's just a combination of very high contrast and resolution and general freedom from aberration. If that's sterile, bring on the sterility.
Paraphrase ... Contax lenses had their time back in the 80's and if more modern Loxia type versions were made these fine old Contax would be relegated to collectors cabinets ....
I have trouble understanding that sentiment. Firstly if Zeiss decided to make a Loxia 85 f/2.8 or 100 f/3.5 I would think the price would be in the €800 region given their current offerings.
Compared to these sub €200 old Contax lenses I would suggest these are seriously good value for money. One is missing the electronic coupling that can invoke focus magnification but other than that I prefer the renderings...Show more →
You are quite right about the value. I was talking partly in jest - even if optically better and equally small lenses come along in the lox line, for some of these old c/y lenses will still be close and a lot cheaper and thus be a very useful for many of us.
I don't, however prefer the 'rendering' of these lenses to the loxias; in fact the look of the lox 21 hands down the most impressive I've seen in a wide. Almost enough to make believe in 3D pop or some such. No not really, only kidding, it's just a combination of very high contrast and resolution and general freedom from aberration. If that's sterile, bring on the sterility.
Apr 25, 2016 at 04:28 PM
p.2 #19CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
rico wrote:
The bad news for David is there are other OEM accessories that he can enjoy with his Contax lenses, including carrying case (in Burgundy leather), pouches (black leather or vinyl), and the screw-in metal caps with Contax logo. The humanity!
Oh no!
(Hides credit card)
Actually I'm pretty immune to OEM tat lust on the whole.
I just have always had an irrational attachment to OEM lens hoods.
Back in the eighties, when an impoverished grad student, I used shell out for expensive Olympus OM hoods for my zuikos, knowing perfectly well that the cheap rubber ones were more effective (and sometimes what I actually used in the field). When I went digital in the early 2000s I went Canon, and would buy their lens hoods despite the fact that almost perfect replicas were to be had for almost nothing.
I think I have some kind of weird unconscious view that the hood is part of the lens, and that its defective without the original hood. I dont endorse this view, and certainly don't reccomend it!
The bad news for David is there are other OEM accessories that he can enjoy with his Contax lenses, including carrying case (in Burgundy leather), pouches (black leather or vinyl), and the screw-in metal caps with Contax logo. The humanity!
Oh no!
(Hides credit card)
Actually I'm pretty immune to OEM tat lust on the whole.
I just have always had an irrational attachment to OEM lens hoods.
Back in the eighties, when an impoverished grad student, I used shell out for expensive Olympus OM hoods for my zuikos, knowing perfectly well that the cheap rubber ones were more effective (and sometimes what I actually used in the field). When I went digital in the early 2000s I went Canon, and would buy their lens hoods despite the fact that almost perfect replicas were to be had for almost nothing.
I think I have some kind of weird unconscious view that the hood is part of the lens, and that its defective without the original hood. I dont endorse this view, and certainly don't reccomend it!
Apr 25, 2016 at 04:40 PM
p.2 #20CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for the test. That's what I'm after until Zeiss gives us a Loxia 100mm..a compact/light alternative to my 70-200/4 and 135/2L for long hikes. The Zeiss seems to pull more resolution in this area and that is really interesting since 100-135mm is the zoom sweet FL.
Take a look at the Voigtlander 90/3.5 as well. That thing is tiny, and razor sharp.
Thanks for the test. That's what I'm after until Zeiss gives us a Loxia 100mm..a compact/light alternative to my 70-200/4 and 135/2L for long hikes. The Zeiss seems to pull more resolution in this area and that is really interesting since 100-135mm is the zoom sweet FL.
Take a look at the Voigtlander 90/3.5 as well. That thing is tiny, and razor sharp.
Apr 25, 2016 at 06:30 PM